If you made a game like Mirrors Egde would it not be in third person? You could see the beauty of the body traversing across cities much clearer, the game would be easier to control and view of your whole body and exactly where you are in a space as opposed to a well educated gues would help.

The game looks awsome but i just think it would play better in third person. Maybe it is just because i am not a big first person fan (the only first person games i like are Half Lifes and Portal).

I think first person is a way of making animating easier sometimes, for shooters it works but for this i don't know.

Discuss.

Isn't the whole appeal of the game because it's in first-person?

If it was third-person, all you'd have would be a present-day Prince of Persia / Assassin's Creed, i.e. nothing to get excited about.

jezz8me:
You could see the BEAUTY OF THE BODY traversing across cities much clearer

It's because the character is a chick your annoyed about the 1st person view?

harhol:
Isn't the whole appeal of the game because it's in first-person?

If it was third-person, all you'd have would be a present-day Prince of Persia / Assassin's Creed, i.e. nothing to get excited about.

THIS.

Your question doesn't even really make sense. They made the game in first-person on purpose, not because they didn't know what they were doing. I personally think it looks incredible, nausea inducing flips and all.

harhol:
Isn't the whole appeal of the game because it's in first-person?

If it was third-person, all you'd have would be a present-day Prince of Persia / Assassin's Creed, i.e. nothing to get excited about.

Yeah, plus when you're leaping over the rooftops it'll be all the more fun because you get to experience what it would be like without getting yourself killed, especially on a big TV.

Uuuuhm.... Is it just me or is it WAY easier to predict where the character is going to jump and land when in First-Person mode? I think it's way harder to steer a character with advanced acrobatics and land where I want to in Third-Person mode.

CyberAkuma:
Uuuuhm.... Is it just me or is it WAY easier to predict where the character is going to jump and land when in First-Person mode? I think it's way harder to steer a character with advanced acrobatics and land where I want to in Third-Person mode.

I found the jumping parts in Half Life and Portal to be incredibly difficult because it was harder to judge where the egdge of a platform was so i jump to early in fear or fall off. That is why i think First Person is not good for jumping.

Problem with third person is that to make it look smooth the characters always seem to have abysmal turning circles.

jezz8me:
I found the jumping parts in Half Life and Portal to be incredibly difficult because it was harder to judge where the egdge of a platform was so i jump to early in fear or fall off. That is why i think First Person is not good for jumping.

Well, it's easier in games where you can see your feet... like Mirror's Edge. If it didn't have that ability I'd be cursing the choice of perspective myself, but in this case you can see when you're toeing the edge.

-- Steve

Half Life wasn't built around the idea of being a Parkour sim, to be fair.

I thought it was the whole point. To bring a new genre or something.

The question you should ask is "Does this game will redeem EA's reputation?"

jezz8me:

CyberAkuma:
Uuuuhm.... Is it just me or is it WAY easier to predict where the character is going to jump and land when in First-Person mode? I think it's way harder to steer a character with advanced acrobatics and land where I want to in Third-Person mode.

I found the jumping parts in Half Life and Portal to be incredibly difficult because it was harder to judge where the edge of a platform was so i jump to early in fear or fall off. That is why i think First Person is not good for jumping.

Ah, but that was because you couldn't see where your feet were. I think Mirrors Edge will solve that (since they're actually giving you a body that can be seen in first person).

Also it seems like a step forward. If more first person games rendered your own body you could do some cool stuff (see your character get stuff out of pockets, button shirts, whatever).

alot of first person games its harder to judge where you landing as when you look down you cant see your feet as someone said. So alot of the time you stand on an edge look down and it appears you are floating in mid air. Yet someone else can see you standing on the edge by the very tip of you toes.

This makes judging landings alot more difficult.

Random argument man:
I thought it was the whole point. To bring a new genre or something.

The question you should ask is "Does this game will redeem EA's reputation?"

Answer, "No"

I'm leery of FPS for anything but shooting but hey, maybe they can pull it off. We have to wait and see.

I haven't watched any trailers for fear of nausea. I do know that it's a First-Person type game that will have you doing flips. Are the trailers any good? And are there hands-on impressions for this game?

jezz8me:
I found the jumping parts in Half Life and Portal to be incredibly difficult because it was harder to judge where the egdge of a platform was so i jump to early in fear or fall off. That is why i think First Person is not good for jumping.

The camera has a wider field of view as well.

Seems like a lot of the problems will be in timing moves. However with every preview and interview I've seen that appears to be by design.

First person makes you feel more like you're really there, in that situation.

Third person never lets you forget that you're NOT there. You're not the character, you're just controlling it.

Mirror's Edge is supposed to be as immersive as possible, therefore it's in first person. It's also doing some interesting new things with FP perspective, such as the ability to see your own limbs. It's a real design challenge, no doubt. But if they can pull it off, it'll be one hell of a game. I hope it works.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fm3ebiMXJmM

Looks impressive.
I get a rush just chucking the avatar off a building in 3rd person games, this'll give me f*uckin' heart palpatations.

Nothing can redeem EA, but it may well redeem DICE.

Random argument man:

The question you should ask is "Will this game redeem EA's reputation?"

I assume you meant to say this?

The_Deleted:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fm3ebiMXJmM
Looks impressive.

I have mixed feelings about that trailer. The person playing obviously knows the level inside out, but what would it be like for first time players? I can't imagine you'd be able to sprint through every level at full speed like a pro.

The music is lovely though. I hope they keep it in the game, in some form or another. And the lack of HUD is a definite plus.

I think not, because they want to be innovative. No one ever did that before. I am making quite a hype about it.

Technically in a nutshell, First person makes animation devoid of having to animate the player character, simplifying renders and cutting down graphics demands. So yes, First person is a way of being lazy. But with First person, control feels more... intimate. Real inside another mind, as opposed to what could illude ones gaming experience of a movie by having a camera hover behind them all the time.

-Javelin-:

jezz8me:
You could see the BEAUTY OF THE BODY traversing across cities much clearer

It's because the character is a chick your annoyed about the 1st person view?

That's one reason the decision to run it in 1st-person annoys me. The look of the heroine is a selling point, so why would I want to play through the game not seeing her?

But I'm mainly opposed to 1st-person because it makes me nauseous. I couldn't take BioShock, nevermind FP parkour. I think Crackdown showed that it's possible to elicit a sense of vertigo in 3rd person--and it didn't make me want to puke, either.

the only annoying thing I can think of so far for that game would be the breathing, I know they're going for the realism shtick but that will grate on my nerves after awhile.

It isn't as hard as you think to play in first person, as long as you can see your feet. At least, in halo 2, I thought is was amazingly easy to jump around like a ninja when I was doing glitches in the multiplayerpart or acting cool with a sword. And there are so many examples of games in third person done wrong when it comes to controls, so 3p doesnt automatically mean better controls.

I have mixed feelings about that trailer. The person playing obviously knows the level inside out, but what would it be like for first time players? I can't imagine you'd be able to sprint through every level at full speed like a pro.

The things you are supposed to climb on are always in red. See what I mean: http://www.gametrailers.com/player/38731.html

Anyway, this is one of the games I'm looking most forward to this year. The music, the graphics, the style, the controls (I think) look all great

EA is doing something new, that's why it's in first person, otherwise it would be a AC clone. If they're able to pull it off, they deserve extra praise. I also find first-person view more realistic. You actually feel like the character rather than a camera man following the character around.

Ray Huling:

-Javelin-:

jezz8me:
You could see the BEAUTY OF THE BODY traversing across cities much clearer

It's because the character is a chick your annoyed about the 1st person view?

That's one reason the decision to run it in 1st-person annoys me. The look of the heroine is a selling point, so why would I want to play through the game not seeing her?

But I'm mainly opposed to 1st-person because it makes me nauseous. I couldn't take BioShock, nevermind FP parkour. I think Crackdown showed that it's possible to elicit a sense of vertigo in 3rd person--and it didn't make me want to puke, either.

Look in a mirror, why do you think the game is called "Mirror's Edge"?

I agree with the thread maker, it should really be in third person.
I'm so sick of this first person trend, lately. "That way you feel like it's you in the game."
I've never felt like that. You'd have to have a 180 view to make it a realistic visual experience. I'm sorry, but my range of site isn't 16:9.
I have never played a first person game and said, "It really feels like it's me." I'd rather play a game that gives the impression that I'm watching (and controlling) a movie, with dramatic camera angles, and cinematic gameplay.

The fact that the main character model is so well made is another reason why this game should be in 3rd person. And no, it wouldn't be an AC clone. This game seems like a fast paced beat-em-up action. That's nothing like Assassin's Creed.

Its in first person because its something new. This has been plenty of times (PoP springes to mind) the whole free running thing. Mirrors Edge is taking a different route. It'll be a challenge, and for all we know they could fall flat on there face (EA have a habbit of doing this after all) but its always nice to see a game do something different.

Personly, from what I've seen so far, It looks incredible. I know you shouldn't judge a game by its graphics but...it looks pritty awesome

Condemned is a brilliant game mainly thanks to the first-person perspective, yet I'm sure some people threw a hissy fit when they heard it'd be a FPSH (First Person Survival/Horror).

Mirror's Edge developers hopefully have given deep thought about the balancing and location issues of first-person view, I hope they have not taken first-person as a way to differentiate from PoP/AC. From the trailers and what I've heard, you can see your body, thus locate yourself more precisely...

Let's just hope instead of already whine before we even know how it will play in the end...

I think First person is a good idea from an innovation point of view I mean so far first person is almost entirely used for shooters while almost every other type of game is 3rd person i.e rts, jrpgs, platformers.
First person also gives a better view of the enviroment while 3rd person cameras angles can often be dodgy tomb raider and occasionaly prince of persia have proved that whereas first person doesn't change.
If mirrors edge was 3rd person it would just be a modern prince of persia and would not interest me because I would just go and play prince instead.

What excatly is Mirror's Edge coming for anyway? I could easily see this game having a lot to do with sixaxis controller.

I don't understand this whole big deal with "innovation" these days. It seems like a game is considered crappy if there's nothing new, ingenious and innovative about it.

I think that's just stupid. I mean, if I want to play a game like Prince of Persia, like, exploring dungeons, and mountains, and all kinds of ancient, exotic locations.
But what if I felt like playing those exact mechanics but in a modern setting, with a fresh new storyline? Suddenly that game is just another PoP clone, and not something new and interesting, simply because it's got similar gameplay mechanics.
Frankly, I'd rather play a bunch of games with different settings and storylines and same tried and tested, solid gameplay mechanics, rather than play something 'new and innovative' just because it's different, even if it could very well end up being an uncomfortable experience.

It would be boring. First, this is freakin' parkour, running, jumping, doing all kinda crazy stuff. The first-person view makes you feel like you're actually jumping there alot more. Also, when in third-person, you'll have to point just where to jump (in a 360 degree rotation) and just do a jump. It is, especially in those corridors when you're running away, to see everything around you, to jump on to little shafts etc.

And after I tried to play Oblivion in 3rd person, I was (still am) horrified by that gameplay style. Well, Gears of War gets the pass. But everything else is, okay Prince of Persia too. That's all.

To answer your questions, no way, in 1st person, this game rocks as much opposed to 3rd person, as 1st class opposed to 3rd class. (In transport, I mean)